捕蝇器与诱蝇笼捕蝇效果的比较研究  

The comparison on the efficacy of catching flies by fly-capturer and fly trap

作　　者：周明浩[1] 吴健[1] 张爱军[1] 杨维芳[1] 陈志龙[1] 刘大鹏[1] 褚宏亮[1] 孙俊[1] 

机构地区：[1]江苏省疾病预防控制中心,江苏南京210009

出　　处：《中华卫生杀虫药械》2005年第5期311-313,共3页Chinese Journal of Hygienic Insecticides and Equipments

摘　　要：目的比较捕蝇器和以糖醋为诱饵的诱蝇笼捕蝇效果。方法模拟现场和现场试验。结果在模拟现场,捕蝇器和诱蝇笼2 h诱捕率分别为92.1%和0.2%;现场试验捕蝇器捕蝇数显著多于诱蝇笼(CH ISQ=11.3,P<0.05),蝇种主要为家蝇和绿蝇。首只苍蝇进入捕蝇器和诱蝇笼的时间分别为6 m in和39 m in,两者有显著性差异(S=-10.5,P<0.05)。结论捕蝇器捕蝇效果好于以糖醋为诱饵的诱蝇笼,可使用于家蝇较多的场所。Objective To compare the efficacy of catching flies by the fly-capturer and fly trap with brown sugar and vinegar as baits. Methods Testing in analogous room and in field. Results In analogous room, the average rate of catching flies by the fly-capturer and fly trap were 92. 1% and 0. 2% in 2h. In field, the amount of caught flies by the fly-capturer was much higher than by the fly trap（ CHISQ=11.3 ,P〈0.05 ）. The dominant flies were genus Musca and Lucilia caught by both of them. The time of the first fly entering into the fly-capturer and fly trap were 6 min and 39 min, and there was more significant difference between them（S=-10. 5,P〈0.05）. Conclusion The efficacy of catching flies by the fly-capturer was better than by fly trap with brown sugar and vinegar as baits, and it should be used in the place where there was more Musca domestica.

关 键 词：捕蝇器 诱蝇器 诱饵 捕蝇效果 

分 类 号：R184.33[医药卫生—流行病学]